Tuesday, February 26, 2013

The Real Alinsky Rules Of Obama

The Real Alinsky Rules Of Obama

If
you are one who wonders what Obama and the people who put him into
office, and no I’m not talking about voters, have in mind, then there is
a clear explanation. It is found in Saul Alinsky’s book Rules For
Radicals. The following are excerpts from Alinsky’s book and frankly it
reads more like a writing from C.S. Lewis’ character Screwtape, as if
the devil himself were giving these rules for radicals.
Hillary Clinton’s 1969 Political Science Thesis (“There is Only the Fight“)
refers to an earlier version of Alinsky’s training manual. “In 1946,”
she wrote, “Alinsky’s first book, Reveille for Radicals, was published.”

Here’s some background information that needs to be understood before going further.

Hillary Clinton’s 1969 Political Science Thesis (“There is Only the Fight“) refers to an earlier version of Alinsky’s training manual.

“In 1946,” she wrote, “Alinsky’s first book, Reveille for Radicals, was published.”

“Obama learned his lesson well. I am proud to see that my
father’s model for organizing is being applied successfully beyond
local community organizing to affect the Democratic campaign in 2008. It
is a fine tribute to Saul Alinsky as we approach his 100th birthday.”

“The Woods Fund, a nonprofit on which Obama served as
paid director from 1999 to December 2002, provided startup funding and
later capital to the Midwest Academy…. Obama sat on the Woods Fund board
alongside William Ayers, founder of the Weather Underground domestic
terrorist organization…. ‘Midwest describes itself as ‘one of the
nation’s oldest and best-known schools for community organizations,
citizen organizations and individuals committed to progressive social
change.’… Midwest teaches Alinsky tactics of community organizing.”

“True revolutionaries do not flaunt their radicalism,
Alinsky taught. They cut their hair, put on suits and infiltrate the
system from within. Alinsky viewed revolution as a slow, patient
process. The trick was to penetrate existing institutions such as churches,
unions and political parties…. Many leftists view Hillary as a sell-out
because she claims to hold moderate views on some issues. However,
Hillary is simply following Alinsky’s counsel to do and say whatever it
takes to gain power.
“Obama is also an Alinskyite…. Obama spent years teaching workshops
on the Alinsky method. In 1985 he began a four-year stint as a community
organizer in Chicago, working for an Alinskyite group called the
Developing Communities Project…. Camouflage is key to Alinsky-style
organizing. While trying to build coalitions of black churches in
Chicago, Obama caught flak for not attending church himself. He became
an instant churchgoer.” (By Richard Poe, 11-27-07)

At its core, Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals is demonic, but don’t take my word for it. Alinsky himself, among many dedications at the beginning of his work, wrote:

“Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder
acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends,
mythology, and history… the first radical known to man who rebelled
against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won
his own kingdom — Lucifer.”

In his Prologue he wrote:
“The Revolutionary force today has two targets, moral as well as material.
Its young protagonists are one moment reminiscent of the idealistic
early Christians, yet they also urge violence and cry, ‘Burn the system
down!’ They have no illusions about the system, but plenty of illusions
about the way to change our world. It is to this point that I have
written this book.”
He then went on to write, “Few of us survived the
Joe McCarthy holocaust of the early 1950s and of those there were even
fewer whose understanding and insights had developed beyond the
dialectical materialism of orthodox Marxism. My fellow radicals who were supposed to pass on the torch of experience and insights to a new generation just were not there.”
To demonstrate the demonic flavor of Alinsky, he quotes Job 7:1, “The
life of man upon earth is a warfare,” while at the same time teaching a
doctrine of devils.
He then states his purpose in writing the book.

“WHAT FOLLOWS IS for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be. The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power. Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away.” pg. 3
“In this book we are concerned with how to create mass organizations to seize power
and give it to the people; to realize the democratic dream of equality,
justice, peace…. ‘Better to die on your feet than to live on your
knees.’ This means revolution.” p.3
“Radicals must be resilient, adaptable to shifting political circumstances, and sensitive enough to the process of action and reaction to avoid being trapped by their own tactics and forced to travel a road not of their choosing.” p.6
“A Marxist begins with his prime truth that all evils are caused
by the exploitation of the proletariat by the capitalists. From this he
logically proceeds to the revolution to end capitalism, then into the
third stage of reorganization into a new social order of the
dictatorship of the proletariat, and finally the last stage — the
political paradise of communism.” p.10
“An organizer working in and for an open society is in an ideological dilemma to begin with, he does not have a fixed truth — truth to him is relative and changing; everything to him is relative and changing…. To the extent that he is free from the shackles of dogma, he can respond to the realities of the widely different situations….” pp.10-11

Alinsky’s tactics were based, not on Stalin’s revolutionary violence, but on the Neo-Marxist strategies of Antonio Gramsci, an Italian Communist. Relying on gradualism, infiltration and the dialectic process rather than a bloody revolution, Gramsci’s transformational Marxism was so subtle that few even noticed the deliberate changes.
Like Alinsky, Mikhail Gorbachev
followed Gramsci, not Lenin. In fact, Gramsci aroused Stalins’s wrath
by suggesting that Lenin’s revolutionary plan wouldn’t work in the West.
Instead the primary assault would be on Biblical absolutes and
Christian values, which must be crushed as a social force before the new
face of Communism could rise and flourish. Malachi Martin gave us a
progress report:
“By 1985, the influence of traditional Christian philosophy in the
West was weak and negligible…. Gramsci’s master strategy was now
feasible. Humanly speaking, it was no longer too tall an order to strip
large majorities of men and women in the West of those last vestiges
that remained to them of Christianity’s transcendent God.”
In Chapter 2 Of Means and Ends, Alinsky wrote about forgetting moral or ethical considerations.

“The end is what you want, the means is how you get it. Whenever we think about social change, the question of means and ends arises. The man of action views the issue of means and ends in pragmatic and strategic terms.
He has no other problem; he thinks only of his actual resources and the
possibilities of various choices of action. He asks of ends only
whether they are achievable and worth the cost; of means, only whether
they will work. … The real arena is corrupt and bloody.” p.24
“The means-and-ends moralists, constantly
obsessed with the ethics of the means used by the Have-Nots against the
Haves, should search themselves as to their real political position. In
fact, they are passive — but real — allies of the Haves…. The most unethical
of all means is the non-use of any means… The standards of judgment
must be rooted in the whys and wherefores of life as it is lived, the world as it is, not our wished-for fantasy of the world as it should be….” pp.25-26
“The third rule of ethics of means and ends is that in war the end justifies almost any means….” p.29
“The seventh rule… is that generally success or failure is a mighty determinant of ethics….” p.34
“The tenth rule… is you do what you can with what you have and clothe it with moral garments….
It involves sifting the multiple factors which combine in creating the
circumstances at any given time… Who, and how many will support the
action?… If weapons are needed, then are appropriate weapons available?Availability of means determines whether you will be underground or above ground; whether you will move quickly or slowly…” p.36

Michelle Obama referenced these words during her Democratic National Convention speech:
“She said, ‘Barack stood up that day,’ referencing a visit to
Chicago neighborhoods, ‘and spoke words that have stayed with me ever
since. He talked about ‘The world as it is’ and ‘The world as it should
be…’ And, ‘All of us driven by a simple belief that the world as it is
just won’t do – that we have an obligation to, fight for the world as it
should be.”
In Chapter 4, The Education of the Organizer, Alinsky writes:

“To the organizer, imagination… is the dynamism that
starts and sustains him in his whole life of action as an organizer. It
ignites and feeds the force that drives him to organize for change….”
“The organizer knows that the real action is in the
reaction of the opposition. To realistically appraise and anticipate the
probable reactions of the enemy, he must be able to identify with them,
too, in his imagination, and foresee their reactions to his actions….
“The organizers searching with a free and open mind void of
certainty, hating dogma, finds laughter not just a way to maintain his
sanity but also a key to understanding life.”pp.74-75
“…the organizer must be able to split himself into two parts —
one part in the arena of action where he polarizes the issue to 100 to
nothing, and helps to lead his forces into conflict, while the other
part knows that when the time comes for negotiations that it really is
only a 10 percent difference.” p.78
“…the organizer is constantly creating new out of the old. He
knows that all new ideas arise from conflict; [See Dialectic Process]
that every time man as had a new idea it has been a challenge to the
sacred ideas of the past and the present and inevitably a conflict has
raged.” p.79

In Chapter 5 titled Communication, the emphasis on conflict,
dialogue, relationships, etc. Team “service” is essential to building
strong relationships through “common involvements.” He writes:

“And so the guided questioning goes on without anyone
losing face or being left out of the decision-making. Every weakness of
every proposed tactic is probed by questions…. Is this manipulation?
Certainly….” p.88
“One of the factors that changes what you can and can’t
communicate is relationships. There are sensitive areas that one does
not touch until there is a strong personal relationship based on common
involvements. Otherwise the other party turns off and literally does not
hear….
“Conversely, if you have a good relationship, he is very
receptive…. For example, I have always believed that birth control and
abortion are personal rights to be exercised by the individual. If, in
my early days when I organized… neighborhood in Chicago, which was 95
per cent Roman Catholic, I had tried to communicate this, even through
the experience of the residents, whose economic plight was aggravated by
large families, that would have been the end of my relationship with
the community. That instant I would have been stamped as an enemy of the
church and all communication would have ceased.
“Some years later, after establishing solid relationships, I
was free to talk about anything…. By then the argument was no longer
limited to such questions as, ‘How much longer do you think the Catholic
Church can hang on to this archaic notion and still survive?’ …the
subject and nature of the discussion would have been unthinkable without
that solid relationship.” pp.93-94

In the Beginning: The Process of Power is the title of
Chapter 6. Alinsky notes the compromise needed to build the power base.
Yet, since pragmatism has eroded all values, it’s simply a matter of
ends justifying means. It’s not unlike churches that attract members
through the world’s entertainment — then continue to soften or hide
Truth in order to keep them happy and lure more.

“From the moment the organizer enters a community he
lives, dreams… only one thing and that is to build the mass power base
of what he calls the army. Until he has developed that mass power base,
he confronts no major issues…. Until he has those means and power
instruments, his ‘tactics’ are very different from power tactics.
Therefore, every move revolves around one central point: how many
recruits will this bring into the organization, whether by means of
local organizations, churches, service groups, labor Unions, corner
gangs, or as individuals.”
“Change comes from power, and power comes from organization.” p.113
“The first step in community organization is community
disorganization. The disruption of the present organization is the first
step toward community organization. Present arrangements must be
disorganized if they are to be displace by new patterns…. All change
means disorganization of the old and organization of the new.” p.116
Compare with this excerpts from “Group Decision and Social Change” by Kurt Lewin:

“A change toward a higher level of group performance is frequently
short lived: after a “shot in the arm”, group life soon returns to the
previous level. This indicates that it does not suffice to define the
objective of a planned change in group performance as the reaching of a
different level. Permanency of the new level, or permanency for a
desired period, should be included in the objective. A successful change
includes therefore three aspects:
Unfreezing (if necessary) the present level…
Moving to the new level . . . and
Freezing group life on the new level.”

“An organizer must stir up dissatisfaction and
discontent… He must create a mechanism that can drain off the underlying
guilt for having accepted the previous situation for so long a time.
Out of this mechanism, a new community organization arises….
“The job then is getting the people to move, to act, to
participate; in short, to develop and harness the necessary power to
effectively conflict with the prevailing patterns and change them. When
those prominent in the status quo turn and label you an ‘agitator’ they
are completely correct, for that is, in one word, your function—to
agitate to the point of conflict.” p.117
“Process tells us how. Purpose tells us why. But in reality, it
is academic to draw a line between them, they are part of a continuum….
Process is really purpose.” p.122

Alinsky, in Chapter 7 titled Tactics, he points out the following:

“Tactics are those conscious deliberate acts by which
human beings live with each other and deal with the world around them. …
Here our concern is with the tactic of taking; how the Have-Nots can
take power away from the Haves.” p.126
Always remember the first rule of power tactics (pps.127-134):
1. “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.”
2. “Never go outside the expertise of your people. When an action
or tactic is outside the experience of the people, the result is
confusion, fear and retreat…. [and] the collapse of communication.
3. “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.
Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This
happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are
blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced
to address.)
4. “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules. You can kill
them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the
Christian church can live up to Christianity.”
5. “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It is almost impossible
to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then
reacts to your advantage.”
6. “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.”
7. “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag. Man can
sustain militant interest in any issue for only a limited time….”
8. “Keep the pressure on, with different tactics and actions, and utilize all events of the period for your purpose.”
9. “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.”
10. “The major premise for tactics is the development of
operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.
It is this unceasing pressure that results in the reactions from the
opposition that are essential for the success of the campaign.”
11. “If you push a negative hard and deep enough, it will break
through into its counterside… every positive has its negative.”
12. “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.”
13. Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.
In conflict tactics there are certain rules that [should be regarded]
as universalities. One is that the opposition must be singled out as the
target and ‘frozen.’…
“…any target can always say, ‘Why do you center on me when
there are others to blame as well?’ When your ‘freeze the target,’ you
disregard these [rational but distracting] arguments…. Then, as you zero
in and freeze your target and carry out your attack, all the ‘others’
come out of the woodwork very soon. They become visible by their support
of the target…’
“One acts decisively only in the conviction that all the
angels are on one side and all the devils on the other.” (pps.127-134)

Additional Notes:
Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals: “Known as the ‘father of modern
American radicalism,’ Saul D. Alinsky (1909-1972) developed strategies
and tactics that take the enormous, unfocused emotional energy of
grassroots groups and transform it into effective anti-government and
anti-corporate activism. … Some of these rules are ruthless, but they
work.”
Article by Phyllis Schalfly titled “Alinski’s Rules: Must Reading
In Obama Era,” posted at
www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=318470857908277 (2-2-09)
“Alinsky’s second chapter, called Of Means and Ends,
craftily poses many difficult moral dilemmas, and his ‘tenth rule of the
ethics of means and ends’ is: ‘you do what you can with what you have
and clothe it with moral arguments.’ He doesn’t ignore traditional
moral standards or dismiss them as unnecessary. He is much more devious;
he teaches his followers that ‘Moral rationalization is indispensable
at all times of action whether to justify the selection or the use of
ends or means.’…
“The qualities Alinsky looked for in a good organizer were:
ego (“reaching for the highest level for which man can reach — to create, to be a ‘great creator,’ to play God”),
curiosity (raising “questions that agitate, that break through the accepted pattern”),
irreverence (“nothing is sacred”; the organizer “detests dogma, defies any finite definition of morality”),
imagination (“the fuel for the force that keeps an organizer organizing”),
a sense of humor (“the most potent weapons known to mankind are satire and ridicule”), and an
organized personality with confidence in presenting the right
reason for his actions only “as a moral rationalization after the right
end has been achieved.’…
“‘The organizer’s first job is to create the issues or problems,’
and ‘organizations must be based on many issues.’ The organizer ‘must
first rub raw the resentments of the people of the community; fan the
latent hostilities of many of the people to the point of overt
expression. He must search out controversy and issues, rather than avoid
them, for unless there is controversy people are not concerned enough
to act. . . . An organizer must stir up dissatisfaction and
discontent.’”
I encourage anyone to read Rules for Radicals via the link I provided
above and see the way the Scriptures of the Old Testament are twisted
to try and use them to promote a demonic worldview and set forth a
battle plan to be used to undermine a culture and overtake a government.
Editor’s Note: Berit Kjos of Crossroads.to
put together the information here and I added a few items as well. Mr.
Kjos gave us permission to utilize the information. Thank you Mr. Kjos
for allowing us to share this with our audience.